DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill

Keith Hill: Someone wishing to see whether development is acceptable in principle may apply for outline planning permission. This has the advantage that detailed drawings are not needed. A local planning authority can grant permission subject to approval of the details (known as reserved matters) within a set timescale. Development may not commence until reserved matters have been approved.
	We believe that outline planning permission has significant faults. At its worst it allows redlining on a map of an area or site for development for a particular use or uses of land with no detail shown. This is not an acceptable state of affairs. Local communities should have early opportunities to engage in discussion of proposed developments.
	The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill therefore seeks to introduce an alternative method whereby a developer can gain an indication as to whether a proposed development would be acceptable. A statement of development principles is a statement of whether or not a local planning authority agrees with the principle of all or part of a proposed development. It does not grant permission, but must be taken into account by an authority determining a subsequent application for planning permission.
	The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill also contains a clause to remove outline planning permission. We have been clear that we will not abolish outline planning permission until statements of development principles have been shown to be an effective alternative. Until then the two systems will work in parallel. We have said that we would review the take up and success of statements of development principles two years after they come into effect and at that time we would also consider what the consequences would be of removing outline planning permission.
	I have received significant representations from organisations representing housebuilders and other major developers indicating their concerns about the potential removal of outline planning permission and its effect on proposed developments.
	On the basis of these representations I am content to indicate that I will consider further the removal of the provision from the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill that abolishes outline planning permission.
	However, if outline planning permission were to be retained this could only be on the basis that it provided the opportunity for greater community involvement and a level of information which will enable local authorities to assess all the significant environmental impacts. To achieve that, developers would need to provide more information than is often the case at present. I am prepared to consider proposals on the scope and extent of that further information and the form that it should take. I shall need to be satisfied that such proposals go far enough to meet our objectives and that they are likely to command a wide consensus among interested parties. At the very least this would need to cover the key design principles, density, the mix and distribution of uses, accessibility and the timescale for the development. I shall therefore be seeking the views of the development industry and local government before deciding whether to retain outline planning permission.
	If we were to pursue this approach the new system of development control could include both statements of development principles and outline planning permission. Statements of development principles would provide developers and local planning authorities with an additional tool for building up an agreed development "prospectus" for a site. Outline planning permission could be used either after or instead of a statement of development principles. This would be for the applicant to decide. Full planning permission, requiring the submission of all details of the proposed development, would not change. It would therefore remain the case that development could not commence until reserved matters had been approved.

National Domestic Violence Help-line

Yvette Cooper: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has today announced a new service providing a single freephone help-line for people seeking help with domestic violence. The help-line service was part of a package of funding announced in December 2002 providing a total of £2 million over three years to support the development of the help-line and 'ukrefugesonline' to provide more effective help in finding domestic violence services. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is working in partnership with Comic Relief, with each contributing £l million to the initiative, and with Refuge and Women's Aid who will be running the helpline.

PPS6—Planning for Town Centres

Keith Hill: I am today announcing the start of the 13-week public consultation period for Planning Policy Statement 6, which sets out the Government's planning policy for town centres.
	Vital and viable town centres have a key role in the delivery of sustainable communities—a vision set out in the Communities Plan. This new draft planning policy statement carries forward the "town centres first" approach established in PPG6 (1996), and clearly sets out positive planning policies, which will encourage investment and growth in city, town and other centres.
	This statement makes clear that development should be focused in existing centres in order to strengthen and, where appropriate, regenerate them, and that local planning authorities should:
	select appropriate, existing centres to accommodate the need for development;
	identify sites within and adjoining these centres for development or redevelopment; and
	provide for the growth of the town centre, expanding the town centre boundary where necessary.
	Due to the need for clearer and more concise statements of Government Policy this PPS does not include technical advice or good practice guidance. The intention is to publish separately a number of companion guides addressing the implementation of the policy. These will include advice on:
	assessing need and impact in respect of new retail and leisure development;
	applying the sequential approach; and
	strategies for smaller centres.
	The companion guides will be published alongside the final version of PPS6.

TRANSPORT

London Underground PPP Consultancy Costs

Tony McNulty: London Transport's (LT) expenditure on external consultancy in relation to the Public Private Partnership (PPP) for the modernisation of London Underground (LU) has been regularly reported to the House since January 1999. The final cost is £103.5 million since the Government announced the PPP on 20 March 1998. As LT's liabilities transferred to Transport for London (TfL) on 15 July 2003, some of the residual final costs were met by London Underground (LU) under TfL's ownership.

Review of the Commission for Integrated Transport

Alistair Darling: On 11 April this year I announced a review of the Commission for Integrated Transport (CfIT) and the Motorists Forum to be undertaken by Charles Rice. Mr Rice has now reported and I have considered his recommendations.
	The Government are grateful to Charles Rice for carrying out an objective, thorough and fair review. I have accepted his recommendations in full, which will be implemented immediately.
	CfIT will retain its responsibility for advising the Government on future transport policy options, the potential for new technology, the identification of best practice in transport and on transport issues which cross departmental boundaries. The Commission will also retain responsibility for refreshing and informing the transport debate through its published reports and other work.
	Charles Rice also recommended that CfIT should no longer have the role of monitoring and reviewing of the achievement of the 10 Year Plan for Transport, a recommendation I accept.
	Both my Department and CfIT are looking forward to developing a close and fruitful working relationship under the refreshed remit now agreed.
	I am pleased to be able to announce that the Motorists Forum will continue with its current remit and structure.
	A copy of the report of the review and CflT's revised terms of reference have been placed in the House Library.

London Tube Emergency Exercise

Alistair Darling: I have today published the key lessons from the emergency exercise held at Bank Underground Station on 7 September 2003. The exercise confirmed that a great deal of work has been done to improve London's capability to respond to major emergencies but identified further areas for action.
	The exercise was designed to enable London's frontline services, fire, police and ambulance, to practise their response to a chemical attack on the Tube.
	This was an extremely valuable exercise, which allowed us to test the capability and constraints of our emergency services under difficult circumstances. Exercises such as this are also an opportunity to learn and we have identified areas that need further development.
	While some of the conclusions need to remain confidential for reasons of security we are today fulfilling our commitment to make public the key findings that the emergency services and others have identified.
	The exercise found that:
	a great deal of work has already been done by Government, Emergency Services and the Mayor of London to improve London's capability to respond to emergencies through improved equipment and planning;
	there needs to be contingency planning, preparation and funding for responding to large scale emergencies and that this work continues to be given high priority;
	work needs to continue to look at and prepare for alternative rescue plans for difficult environments like the London Underground;
	work needs to continue to improve the ability of those wearing protective suits to be able to communicate under difficult conditions;
	ambulance crews need to be able to provide earlier assessment, care and delivery of specific antidotes to contaminated casualties; and,
	we must not underestimate the number of people and specialist equipment required to respond to such emergencies.
	The Government, the Mayor of London and London's emergency services will continue to work together, through the London Resilience Forum, to ensure these lessons are learnt to improve the capital's preparedness, now and for years to come.
	The exercise held at Bank Underground station on 7 September was designed to test specific elements of the emergency services' response to a chemical attack on the Tube.
	The exercise was organised by the London Resilience Forum, the pan-London emergency planning body chaired by London Resilience Minister, Nick Raynsford, with Ken Livingstone, Mayor of London, as deputy chair.
	It was one of an extensive programme of exercises that continues to be held to test and help improve our resilience to a major terrorist attack. Further exercises are planned over the next two years, including a joint UK-US exercise planned for 2005.

Rail Regulator's Interim Review

Alistair Darling: The rail regulator published on 12 December the final conclusions of his interim review of track access charges (TACs), setting out his determination of what Network Rail needs to spend over the next five years, and how this expenditure should be financed.
	I welcome the regulator's conclusions. In total, these represent a significant increase in Network Rail's income requirement over the next five years compared with the conclusions he reached in his October 2000 access charges review, but with a requirement for substantial efficiencies and improvements in performance. It is essential that the industry now works together to ensure that these are delivered.
	The regulator is providing flexibility for Network Rail to reprofile its grant payments over time, including increased borrowing by the company in the short term. He has said that he expects Network Rail to use this flexibility. In respect of the years. 2004–05 and 2005–06, as long as he is satisfied that the balance of Network Rail's total income requirements will be met in full by borrowing, the regulator may confirm by the end of February 2004 a lower level of income from track access charges and grants for Network Rail than he has set out. From April 2006 Network Rail will receive the full revenues that the regulator has established.
	It is common practice for companies to borrow to fund a peak in investment. I believe that on the basis of the sound financial footing that the regulator has established for Network Rail and the strength of its financial structure, including its proposed securitisation and proposed modifications to its existing support facilities, it should be able to increase its borrowing above the levels presently assumed by the regulator. For 2004–05 and 2005–06, taking account of the flexibility offered by the regulator for Network Rail to increase its borrowing, I expect the results of this review to be accommodated within the Government's existing expenditure total. Final decisions on how to fund the increases beyond that will be taken in the spending review next year.
	In line with the Government's fiscal rules which prohibit Government borrowing for current expenditure over the economic cycle, it is appropriate that Government support for capital expenditure by Network Rail is funded through capital grants paid by the SRA, rather than through track access charges paid by train operators. The regulator is providing a mechanism under which the balance between grants and TACs will be also be determined by the end of February 2004.
	The total income requirement determined by the regulator is unaffected by the relative proportions which are provided by network grant and TACs. The fact that a high proportion of Network Rail's income may be provided as grant from the SRA does not mean that they acquire any control or influence over the company. Network Rail must continue to operate at arm's length from the SRA. It must focus on meeting the needs of its real customers—the freight and passenger operators. I am sure this point is understood by all concerned.
	In February 2003 I laid before the House a letter of comfort to the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) setting out the Government's commitment to fund the SRA so that it could meet its financial obligations. I am aware that the SRA has a contractual obligation to fund in full increases in TACs resulting from access charges reviews. In addition, the SRA will enter a contractual commitment to pay the network grants determined by the regulator in his access charges review. Letters of comfort cannot and must not fetter the Secretary of State's discretion, but the letter to the SRA is a correct representation of my current intention in these matters.
	In a statement to Parliament in June 2002, I set out the key overarching principles for the regulatory framework for railways. Independent economic regulation was one such overarching principle for which there was an "essential continuing requirement". This remains the Government's position.
	In July 2004 the powers of the individual Regulator will transfer to a regulatory board, in line with reforms to regulatory authorities in other sectors. The checks and balances in decision making by a suitably structured Board should reinforce the independence of regulation. The functions and duties of the ORR are not being changed by the transfer to a regulatory board.

HEALTH

Contingency Planning

John Hutton: Last December, I announced the steps that the Department were taking to strengthen our plans against any deliberate release of biological agents, including smallpox. That announcement included three main components: improved vaccine stocks; a plan of action; and a cohort of immunised staff.
	We have no evidence of a specific threat of smallpox attack on the UK. However, it is sensible and prudent to ensure that the National Health Service can deal effectively with any potential threat.
	Over this last year, we have taken action to increase substantially our stocks of smallpox vaccine, and have announced a contract for a second procurement. This will enable us to provide new vaccine for the whole population, if required.
	Our plan of action has been updated and revised following discussion and comment. The plan revisions incorporate valuable input from a wide range of medical experts and groups within the NHS as well as other Government departments. Implementation of the plan is being co-ordinated by the Health Protection Agency's (HPA) regional leads. I am today publishing the revised Plan, copies of which are available in the Vote Office and can be accessed on the Department of Health website at:http://www.doh.gov.uk/smallpox/smallpox.htm
	Regional smallpox response groups have been established in England, and core team members vaccinated in advance. We now plan to vaccinate a small number of ambulance workers to assist these groups, and to support the initial response to a smallpox emergency. Corresponding arrangements are being made for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
	The Department's primary strategy is still to contain and "ring vaccinate" around any outbreak.
	This work continues to be taken forward under the cross-Government civil contingencies machinery for which my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary has overall responsibility.

TRADE AND INDUSTRY

UK Online Annual Report 2003

Patricia Hewitt: The fourth UK Online annual report has been published today and copies have been placed in the House Libraries. The report is also available on the Office of the e-Envoy website.

WORK AND PENSIONS

Council Tax Benefit

Chris Pond: Currently, people living in properties in council tax bands F, G or H have their council tax benefit restricted to the maximum amount payable for a band E property.
	We have listened to representations from local government and others and we accept that this restriction is increasingly biting unfairly on people in larger properties. These will include pensioner owner occupiers who have worked hard all their lives to buy their houses, or large families in rented accommodation, who are not asset rich and unable to move to a property in a lower council tax band. Its removal will make council tax benefit fairer and easier to access. We have therefore decided to abolish the council tax benefit restriction from April 2004.
	Local authorities also have the extra burden of having to collect small amounts of council tax from those who are required to meet the shortfall from their own resources. Abolishing the restriction will remove this burden too.
	The introduction of pension credit has been designed in such a way as to ensure that some 1.9 million pensioners should qualify for more help, or help for the first time, with their council tax bills. We estimate some 310,000 pensioners will qualify for the first time.
	Council tax benefit provides financial help to council tax payers on low income. However not all those who are currently entitled to help with their council tax bills are claiming this benefit. For example, although some 2.4 million pensioners already receive council tax benefit we estimate that up to 1.4 million pensioners may be missing out on the help to which they are entitled.
	Local authorities have a statutory responsibility for promoting awareness of council tax benefit with their council tax payers. Many authorities have well developed take-up strategies while others rely solely on information issued with the council tax bill. However we want to do more to support them in this task and ensure more pensioners and those on low income are receiving the help to which they are entitled.
	In the New Year the Government will be launching a campaign to raise the awareness of council tax benefit among those who are likely to be entitled and also their family, friends and carers. Working with local authorities, we will provide promotional material, and will develop guidance and advice to help ensure that procedures are in place to handle enquiries about entitlement and provide support for those, particularly pensioners, making claims.
	We are already working in partnership with local authorities to improve performance in housing and council tax benefit administration. We now need also to focus on take-up, where take-up of council tax benefit lags behind that of other benefits.
	There is much that the Department is already doing. The pension service is already inviting claims for council tax benefit when an application for pension credit is made, and we recently introduced a shortened claim form for pensioners applying for housing or council tax benefit to make claiming easier. The local pension service is working with local partners, including local authorities, to help reach the more vulnerable pensioners.
	We also recognise and appreciate the pivotal role that the voluntary sector can play in promoting take-up of benefits. We know some older people prefer to deal with organisations such as Age Concern and Help the Aged. As part of developing a "third age" network we are building closer and more effective partnerships with the voluntary sector. The campaign will reinforce the valuable work they already do.
	The measures I am announcing today will provide local authorities with more support from central Government in undertaking their statutory responsibilities, and build on the work already taking place at local level.
	More generally, the Government are committed to ensuring that local authorities can provide decent local services without making excessive demands on local taxpayers.
	My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister has announced that the Government will next year be providing total support to local authorities of £54.5 billion—up from £50.8 billion for 2003–04 on a like for like basis.
	Given the scale of the Government's investment in local services and the scope for efficiency improvements in local government, the Government believe next year local authorities must aim to deliver council tax increases in low single figures. The Government are prepared to use its targeted capping powers next year if necessary to protect local taxpayers.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

Democratic Republic of Congo

Chris Mullin: Following consultations with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the Ministry of Defence, the Department of Trade and Industry issued a licence for the export to the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) of body armour and military helmets. This equipment will be used by the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs, who are part of the United Nations operation in the DRC.
	UN Security Council Resolution (SCR) 1493 (2003), adopted on 28 July 2003, implemented an embargo on the provision of arms and any related materiel to all armed groups operating in the east of the country. Operative Paragraph 21 of the SCR provides an exemption to the embargo for
	"supplies of non-lethal equipment intended solely for humanitarian or protective use . . . ".

NORTHERN IRELAND

Security Vetting Arrangements

Jane Kennedy: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State, in a written ministerial statement on 12 December 2002, Official Report, col. 32WS, announced a thorough and comprehensive review of security vetting arrangements in Northern Ireland.
	I am glad to report that an initial programme of reform is underway to improve the effectiveness of current protective security arrangements across the Northern Ireland Office, the Northern Ireland Departments, PSNI, and associated bodies. These changes will take some months to implement in full.
	This programme is identifying vulnerabilities and establishing appropriate protective security arrangements to prevent disruption or compromise. These arrangements include where necessary the security clearance of staff. These arrangements are in accordance with recognised best practice and normal government requirements.
	In particular, in future applicants for posts in the Northern Ireland Civil Service will undergo a basic check procedure, designed to ensure that they are adequately identified; and will be asked to declare any unspent criminal records. This will bring to an end the existing practice of security vetting all administrative applicants. All those staff occupying, or who are to occupy, posts in specific areas identified in the programme of reform as requiring security clearance on grounds of national security, will be required to undergo national security vetting, to the appropriate level, in accordance with stated Government policy.
	These protective security arrangements will be kept under regular review. Future security vetting policy changes will be screened for their impact on equality, and where necessary subject to formal equality impact assessment.
	I am confident that these steps will help to safeguard the essential functions of government in Northern Ireland; protect the public from risk, and meet human rights and equality obligations.
	The work of the review will carry on into next year; I will make further statements as and when I reach decisions on recommendations made to me.

TREASURY

Review of National Insurance Contributions—2004–05

Dawn Primarolo: I have completed the annual review under section 141 of the Social Security Administration Act 1992. I propose the following changes to take effect from 6 April 2004. These rates and limits will also apply to Northern Ireland National Insurance Contributions. Employers and Employees
	In line with the Social Security Contributions and Benefits Act 1992, the Lower Earnings Limit for primary Class 1 contributions is to be raised to £79 a week. It is set at the level of the basic Retirement Pension for a single person from April 2004 and rounded down to the nearest pound.
	The Primary and Secondary Thresholds for Class 1 contributions will continue to be aligned with the weekly amount of the income tax personal allowance, which will be increased to £4,745 from April 2004. The Primary and Secondary Thresholds will therefore be increased to £91 a week. This means that no tax or Class 1 contributions will actually be paid on earnings below this level.
	The Upper Earnings Limit for primary Class 1 contributions will be raised to £610.
	The self-employed
	The rate of Class 2 contributions will be raised to £2.05 a week.
	Self-employed people with earnings below the annual Small Earnings Exception can apply to be exempted from paying Class 2 contributions. This limit will be raised by £120 to £4,215 in line with inflation.
	The annual lower profits limit for liability to Class 4 contributions will increase to £4,745 a year (in line with the income tax personal allowance). The Upper Profits Limit will increase by £780 to £31,720, to maintain the link with employees' earnings liable to Class 1 contributions.
	Class 3
	The rate of Class 3 voluntary contributions will be increased by 20 pence to £7.15 a week.
	Share fishermen
	The special rate of Class 2 contributions for share fishermen, which allows them to build entitlement to contributory Jobseekers' Allowance in addition to the other contributory benefits available to the self-employed, will be increased to £2.70 a week.
	Volunteer Development Workers
	The special rate of Class 2 contributions for volunteer development workers, which entitles them to the full range of contributory benefits, will be increased by 10 pence to £3.95 in line with the statutory formula of 5 per cent of the primary Class 1 Lower Earnings Limit.
	Treasury Grant
	I need to ensure that the Fund can maintain a prudent working balance throughout the coming year. In accordance with section 2 (2) of the Social Security Act 1993, I propose to do so by prescribing that the maximum Treasury Grant which may be made available to the Fund in 2004–05 shall not exceed 2 per cent of the estimated benefit expenditure for that year. Similar provision will be made in respect of the Northern Ireland National Insurance Fund.
	I shall be laying a draft re-rating order before Parliament in due course. This will accompany a report by the Government Actuary to myself and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions which we shall jointly present to Parliament.
	The following table sets out the rates, earnings limits and thresholds for National Insurance Contributions proposed for 2004–05.
	
		National Insurance Contributions, Proposed re-rating, April 2004
		
			 Item 2004–05  
		
		
			 Lower Earnings Limit, primary Class 1 £79  
			 Upper Earnings Limit, primary Class 1 £610  
			 Primary Threshold £91  
			 Secondary Threshold £91  
			 Employees' primary Class 1 rate 11% from £91.01 to £610 plus1% above £610  
			 Employees' contracted-out rebate 1.6%  
			 Married women's reduced rate 4.85% from £91 01 to £610 plus 1% above £610  
			 Employers' secondary Class 1 rate 12.8% on earnings above £91  
			 Employers' contracted-out rebate, salary-related schemes 3.5%  
			 Employers' contracted-out rebate, money-purchase schemes 1.0%  
			 Class 2 rate £2.05  
			 Class 2 Small Earnings Exception £4,215  
			 Special Class 2 rate for share fishermen £2.70  
			 Special Class 2 rate for volunteer development workers £3.95  
			 Class 3 rate £7.15  
			 Class 4 rate 8% from £4,745 to £31,720 plus 1% above £31,720 
			 Class 4 Lower Profits Limit £4,745 
			 Class 4 Upper Profits Limit £31,720

DEFENCE

Service Pensions Taxation Error

Ivor Caplin: The report of the internal inquiry into the incorrect deduction of tax from Service attributable pensions recommended that, in addition to the Inland Revenue refund and repayment supplement, consideration should be given to further compensation for those affected by the error. The Inland Revenue allowed a significant concession in waiving the time limits that normally apply in refunds of tax. However, representations have been made that the Ministry of Defence should pay further compensation to those pensioners for whom the effect of the error persisted over a considerable number of years. The Government accept that, where individuals suffer a financial loss as a result of its administrative errors, then the onus is on that Department to restore those individuals to the position they would have enjoyed had the errors not occurred. The Ministry of Defence has already accepted responsibility for the errors which led to tax being wrongly deducted and has apologised unreservedly. We further accept that, in certain cases, payments made so far have not provided full compensation for the cost of the errors to individuals.
	I have therefore decided that further ex-gratia compensation will be paid to those who were in receipt of pensions outside the normal six-year Inland Revenue repayment period. Compensation will be calculated by applying compound interest, using the Retail Prices Index plus 2 per cent. to the tax wrongly deducted, net of the estimated repayment by the Inland Revenue. We will also pay ex-gratia compensation, calculated in the same way, to those who suffered from the related error of delays in payment of benefits under the Armed Forces Pension Scheme, including using the Inland Revenue Repayment formula for compensation for errors within the normal six-year period. Payment will be made as quickly as possible.
	It will, however, take some months to complete all payments because the necessary data on each individual are held mainly on manual records. We deeply regret the errors made but I hope that this offer of compensation will draw matters to a satisfactory conclusion.
	Finally, I would like to express my considerable gratitude to those pensioners, in particular Major John Perry and Captain John Lewis, who have worked tirelessly to bring this matter to our attention and to help with its resolution.